Last week, the Democrats made it official. They finally took a vote on their partisan impeachment and proved just how partisan it really is, with not a single Republican in favor.
But as many have pointed out, the vote doesnt make this legitimate. In fact, the truth is the exact opposite of what the Democrats and their lackeys in the ruling class state media have been saying -- that Republicans focus on process because the facts are bad.
That is dead wrong. Yes, the process favors the Democrats. But the facts favor President Trump. Nothing -- not a single fact in this case -- comes close to justifying the overturning of an election. Thats why the Democrats and the media are so hysterical.
TRUMP WANTS REPUBLICANS TO RELEASE THEIR OWN ACCOUNTS FROM IMPEACHMENT PROBE
Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md.: ... Putting both our democracy and the nations security in jeopardy.
Brian Williams, MSNBC host: The most treacherous phase of his time in office thus far.
Rep. Katherine Clark, D-Mass.: The betrayal of this president of his oath of office, of the integrity of the 2020 elections, and of our national security ...
Rep. Andy Levin, D-Mich.: This is my most disturbing day in Congress.
As a public service to you, the American people, we will fact-check the hysterics on The Next Revolution,and bring you, as we promisedto do, the facts every Sunday as long as this farce goes on, the truth about impeachment.
Lets start with the speeches on the impeachment vote and possibly the most partisan of that all the House Democrats -- and thats saying something -- Democratic Caucus Chair Hakeem Jeffries.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE OPINION NEWSLETTER
HakeemJeffries, D-N.Y.: The House impeachment Inquiry is about abuse of power.
Abuse of power. Lets see, when you refuse to accept the result of an election, mobilize the resources of the state to pursue a Russia conspiracy theory aimed at overturning that election, and the second that falls apart, drop it in favor a new effort to overturn an election through non-democratic means, yes, Id say this impeachment is about abuse of power. Its about the Democrats abuse of power.
Next, heres more from Jeffries:
Jeffries: Its about betrayal.
Oh, really? Werent you the ones who said when you took the majority last year, youd focus on health care and infrastructure and work for the Americans and then dumped all of that in favor of this impeachment obsession.
Yes, it sounds like betrayal to me -- the Democrats betrayal of their voters.
And theres more:
Jeffries: Its about corruption.
Corruption. The only actual corruption allegation in this whole story is the one against Joe Biden -- cash for gas. Vice President Biden channeling U.S. taxpayer money to a Ukrainian gas company paying his son.
But instead of investigating it, the Democrats want to impeach the guy who wants it investigated. Thats how much they care about corruption.
Jeffries: Its about national security.
What? How is it about national security? If he means its about standing up to Russia, the Democrats should impeach themselves because no one has been as weak on Russia as they were under Obama.
Jeffries: Its about the undermining of our elections.
Well, he is right about that. Undermining our elections is what the Democrats have been doing every day since 2016.
Jeffries: Its about defending our democracy for the people.
Oh please. If you want to defend democracy for the people, why dont you let them choose the next president instead of a cabal of politicians in Washington.
And Jeffries finished up with this little gem, one that was endlessly repeated by all the rest of them.
Jeffries: No one is above the law.
Yes, I think that needs a bit of a qualifier, Hakeem. No one is above the law except Joe Biden, who is accused of directing billions of dollars in taxpayer cash to the Ukrainian gas industry and his familys business. And when anyone asks questions about it, they get impeached.
Joe Biden wants to be president. Don't you think we need to know if he channeled U.S. aid into his son's company?
No one is above the law. What a total joke these people are!
But all of that was nothing compared to the vomit-inducing display of hypocrisy from the Queen of Corruption, Nancy Pelosi.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi: Sadly, this is not any cause for any glee or comfort. This is something that is very solemn, that is something prayerful.
Solemn and prayerful. What? Like this?
Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif.: Impeach 45!
Crowd (chanting): Impeach 45!
Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich.: Because were going to go in there and were going to impeach the mother------.
Solemn and prayerful. My God.
But Pelosi topped even that. I cant quite believe she read out these words, but she did. She honestly did.
Pelosi: Yes, as we go forward with this, we will do so in a way that brings people together, that is healing rather than dividing.
Healing. For months, she said you cant do impeachment unless its bipartisan. She has not a single Republican in favor of it. But now she goes ahead anyway. And then says its going to bring people together -- healing. She literally said healing.
This is the most divisive political act in, what,50 years? One hundredyears? More? And she talks about healing... right.
One little bit of fact-checking from last week, if I may. The Democrats wheeled out another disgruntled bureaucrat, Alexander Vindman, and it was another bombshell that turned out to be a damp squib.
The transcript of the phone call wasnt verbatim. There were words left out.
Yes, we knew that.
Yes, I'd say this impeachment is about abuse of power. It's about the DEMOCRATS' abuse of power.
Officials were concerned about the phone call and talked to superiors about it.
Yes, we knew that.
Alexander Vindman is a decorated military veteran. Yes, and good for him. He was obviously a hero in military life. But now hes in civilian life, and in a constitutional federal republic, we dont blindly follow military figures. Thats the kind of soldier worship you get in a banana republic.
So lets fact-check Vindmans central claim. He said, I did not think it was proper to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen, and I was worried about the implications for the U.S. governments support of Ukraine.
Oh, yes, terribly worried.
But hang on a second. Vindman was a senior official throughout the Obama administration, from 2008responsible for Eurasia, working in Ukraine and Russia. He returned to work for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, focusing on Russia, and then another senior Pentagon job.
All those eight years when Obama refused to send any proper military aid to Ukraine, when he sent blankets instead of the weapons that President Trump actually did send, not a peep came out of Alexander Vindmanor any of these career civil servants coming out of the woodwork to now proclaim the vital importance of military aid to Ukraine.
As for Vindmans concern about investigating a U.S. citizen, he makes it sound like the president wanted Ukraine to poke around in Grandma Marys knicker drawer. Were talking about a former vice president who is accused of funneling billions of dollars of taxpayer money to a shady gas company paying his son. Of course, that should be investigated!
And by the way, to all the ruling class robots endlessly reciting, Is it appropriate to ask a foreign country to investigate a political rival? -- of course, it is!The fact that Biden is President Trumps political rival is the reason he should be investigated.
He wants to be president. Dont you think we need to know if he channeled U.S. aid into his sons company? And the fact that the money went to Ukraine is the reason we need to ask a foreign government to help with the investigation.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Isnt it hilarious that the ruling class cares more about a request to investigate corruption than the actual corruption? Thats because what Hunter Biden did in Ukraine, in China and God knows where else is the ruling class business model. Thats why theyre all defending him, and thats why theyre out to get Trump -- because he is exposing it.
So as we keep telling you, this whole impeachment thing, it is truly the system striking back and trying to cancel the populist revolution. We must not let them.
Adapted from Steve Hiltons monologue on The Next Revolution on Nov. 3, 2019.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM STEVE HILTONB:
老钱庄四肖【荀】【老】【头】【子】【知】【道】【他】【唯】【一】【的】【徒】【弟】【居】【然】【就】【这】【样】【死】【了】【之】【后】，【就】【日】【以】【继】【夜】【的】【往】【王】【都】【赶】【去】。【在】【最】【后】【一】【刻】，【他】【把】【十】【公】【主】【的】【尸】【体】【偷】【了】【出】【来】。 “【怎】【么】【会】【这】【样】？”【荀】【老】【头】【手】【上】【符】【一】【点】【反】【应】【都】【没】【有】，“【小】【丫】【头】【的】【魂】【魄】【呢】？” 【他】【在】【地】【面】【上】【摆】【了】【个】【锁】【魂】【阵】，【可】【是】【他】【却】【招】【不】【来】【十】【公】【主】【的】【灵】【魂】。 “【这】【到】【底】【是】【怎】【么】【回】【事】？”【荀】【老】【头】【翻】【阅】【了】【汜】【水】【观】
【三】【人】【瞬】【间】【懵】【逼】【了】。 【看】【看】【一】【脸】【傻】【笑】【的】【王】【刚】，【黄】【老】【爷】【子】【感】【觉】【自】【己】【心】【好】【累】。 【说】【好】【的】【资】【质】【愚】【钝】【呢】。 【说】【好】【的】【脑】【子】【不】【好】【使】【呢】？ 【这】【打】【脸】【来】【的】【不】【要】【太】【快】！ 【自】【己】【刚】【才】【还】【信】【誓】【旦】【旦】【的】【说】【这】【小】【子】【估】【计】【一】【年】【才】【能】【突】【破】，【可】【话】【还】【没】【说】【完】【呢】，【这】【小】【子】【就】【嘿】【嘿】【笑】【着】【告】【诉】【你】【他】【进】【入】【第】【三】【层】【了】…… 【人】【生】【如】【此】【艰】【难】。 【一】【旁】【的】**【也】
“【这】…”**【惊】【道】：“【既】【然】【大】【兄】【有】【危】【险】，【还】【不】【尽】【起】【大】【军】【前】【去】【营】【救】，【管】【什】【么】【袁】【无】【殇】？” “【胡】【闹】！”【贾】【仁】【怒】【道】：“【听】【命】【行】【事】！【若】【坏】【了】【主】【公】【的】【大】【事】，【就】【算】【砍】【了】【你】【那】【颗】【头】【都】【没】【用】！” “【哦】！”**【讪】【讪】【而】【退】，【他】【也】【是】【一】【时】【情】【急】。【其】【实】【以】【袁】【无】【殇】【的】【军】【势】，【就】【算】【要】【救】【援】【北】【城】，【也】【不】【能】【直】【接】【率】【兵】【去】【闯】。 “【苏】【启】，【你】【率】【兵】【与】【我】老钱庄四肖【白】【池】【很】【不】【要】【脸】【的】【话】，【这】【边】【才】【刚】【一】【传】【出】，【那】【边】【剑】【圣】【气】【的】【一】【句】【话】【都】【不】【知】【道】【怎】【么】【说】【了】，【直】【指】【指】【着】【白】【池】，【缓】【了】【一】【口】【淡】【淡】【的】【冷】【气】，【上】【来】【便】【是】【说】【着】：“【现】【在】【想】【起】【来】？【可】【以】【给】【老】【夫】【否】？” “【不】【行】【呀】！”【白】【池】【眨】【着】【眼】，【有】【意】【无】【意】【的】【说】【着】【话】。 “【本】【圣】【今】【日】【算】【是】【知】【道】【了】，【为】【什】【么】【那】【位】【不】【教】【你】【了】。”【剑】【圣】【今】【天】【算】【是】【见】【识】【到】【了】【什】【么】【才】【叫】【真】【正】
【忽】【然】【想】【起】【来】，【还】【没】【有】【介】【绍】【自】【己】【的】【这】【个】【好】【友】，【于】【是】【洛】【老】【爷】【子】【又】【指】【着】【坐】【在】【他】【对】【面】【的】【这】【个】【老】【头】【子】【说】【道】。 “【其】【他】【人】【一】【般】【都】【是】【叫】【他】【齐】【老】【的】，【你】【跟】【那】【两】【个】【孩】【子】【一】【样】，【都】【叫】【我】【们】【爷】【爷】【就】【行】【了】。” 【通】【过】【这】【么】【一】【段】【时】【间】【的】【缓】【冲】，【沈】【书】【楠】【也】【总】【算】【是】【回】【过】【了】【些】【神】【来】，【对】【着】【两】【个】【老】【人】【家】【点】【了】【点】【头】:“【那】【个】【我】” 【大】【概】【知】【道】【沈】【书】【楠】【是】【在】【意】【和】
“【谁】——？！！”【惊】【骇】【之】【下】，【卡】【塞】【尔】【不】【禁】【爆】【喝】【了】【出】【来】：“【给】【我】【出】【来】！” 【其】【实】【不】【用】【他】【说】，【众】【人】【已】【经】【发】【现】【来】【者】【根】【本】【没】【有】【隐】【藏】【的】【打】【算】，【直】【接】【就】【光】【明】【正】【大】【地】【现】【身】【了】。 【只】【见】【大】【厅】【中】【一】【处】【空】【间】【忽】【然】【泛】【起】【了】【一】【丝】【涟】【漪】，【然】【后】【一】【只】【白】【色】【的】【史】【莱】【姆】【便】【犹】【如】【从】【水】【面】【下】【跳】【出】【来】【一】【般】【从】【那】【阵】【轻】【微】【的】【空】【间】【涟】【漪】【中】【跳】【了】【出】【来】，【然】【后】【没】【等】【卡】【塞】【尔】【他】
【不】【知】【何】【时】，【码】【头】【这】【边】【突】【然】【多】【出】【了】【一】【个】“【捕】【鱼】【翁】”。 【说】【来】【也】【奇】【怪】，【这】“【捕】【鱼】【翁】”【每】【次】【出】【海】【的】【时】【候】【都】【带】【着】【好】【多】【东】【西】，【可】【回】【来】【的】【时】【候】【他】【又】【变】【成】【了】【两】【手】【空】【空】【的】【模】【样】。 【好】【长】【一】【段】【时】【间】【过】【去】【了】，【他】【依】【旧】【一】【无】【所】【获】。 【码】【头】【这】【边】【的】【人】【对】【他】【的】【行】【为】【很】【是】【不】【解】，【明】【明】【捉】【不】【鱼】，【为】【什】【么】【还】【不】【放】【弃】【呢】？ 【一】【而】【再】【再】【而】【三】【地】【浪】【费】【物】【资】【出】
“【南】【宫】【易】，【你】【放】【开】【我】……”【元】【小】【糖】【推】【着】【南】【宫】【易】。 【他】【却】【突】【然】【抱】【住】【她】，【覆】【盖】【了】【她】【的】【唇】。 “【哇】！”【这】【一】【吻】，【让】【周】【围】【的】【人】【都】【意】【外】【的】【叫】【了】【起】【来】。 “【让】【开】！”【一】【声】【怒】【吼】【之】【后】。 【顾】【侑】【晨】【就】【抓】【住】【了】【南】【宫】【易】【的】【肩】【膀】，【把】【他】【用】【力】【的】【推】【开】。 【元】【小】【糖】【获】【得】【自】【由】，【急】【忙】【用】【手】【背】【擦】【嘴】【巴】。 【她】【竟】【然】【被】【南】【宫】【易】【吻】【了】！ 【南】【宫】【易】【一】